Main Menu

Not Real Climate

“REALCLIMATE is a commentary site (blog) on climatology by a group of climate scientists for the interested public and journalists. It aims to provide a quick response to developing stories and provide the context sometimes missing in mainstream commentary. The discussion is intended to be restricted to scientific topics and to avoid political or economic implications of the science. The web hosting for RealClimate is provided by Environmental Media Services, a non-profit public relations firm, though they exercise no control over the content.” Wikpedia

“At Real Climate, quite a few of the comments that they post continue to incorrectly interpret the observed behavior of the global average upper ocean heat content changes and sea level rise over the last 5 years.” Roger Pielke Senior

25 Responses to Not Real Climate

At Real Climate, quite a few of the comments that they post continue to incorrectly interpret the observed behavior of the global average upper ocean heat content changes and sea level rise over the last 5 years.” Roger Pielke Senior

this is the same Pielke, who said about arctic sea ice:

“since 2008, the anomalies have actually decreased.”

i am sorry, but he has a lot of work to do, before anyone with any understanding of climate will want to listen to what Pielke said.

All of these analyses are consistent with no significant heating in the upper ocean and a flattening of sea level rise, and even more clearly, that these climate metrics are not “progressing faster than was expected a few years ago”.

Real Climate has it backwards; these climate metrics are changing less than was expected a few years ago!

The Leuliette et al paper states

“An analysis of the steric and ocean mass components of sea level shows that the sea level rise budget for the period January 2004 to December 2007 can be closed…….we find that the sum of steric sea level and the ocean mass component has a trend of 1.5 ± 1.0 mm/a over the period.”

This finding is not flat, but it is not still does not support the claim by Real Climate that this climate metric “is progressing faster than was expected a few years ago”. In fact, this rate of sea level rise is even less than reported in Cazenave et al 2009!

Here is what I propose to Real Climate in an attempt to move to a constructive dialog. I request that they answer these questions:

1. Using the upper ocean heat data from 2004 to the present, what is the Real Climate best estimate of the accumulation of heat in Joules?

2. Using that value of heat accumulation, what is the diagnosed global average radiative imbalance over the time period? How does this compare with Jim Hansen’s value of an imbalance of 0.85 W/m2 for the end of the 1990s?

These are well defined scientific questions. If Real Climate provides clear answers to them, we have moved forward to a more constructive scientific debate. I will keep you posted.

Gavin is full of Schmidt. He admits his models are nasty mistakes when he claims oceans raised much more than expected. why were his models so far off?
Then the TRUTH is they actually rose so much less. So even his data was intentionally false.
Government workers are apparently not the top of the chromosome pool.

I’m saying that the ‘short record’ low for Arctic sea ice of 2007 wasn’t repeated in 2008, and won’t be repeated in 2009. Furthermore, there were a number of contributory factors for the record low of 2007, including atmospheric circulations – not CO2:

The unprecedented retreat of first-year ice during summer 2007 was enhanced by strong poleward drift over the western Arctic induced by anomalously high sea-level pressure (SLP) over the Beaufort Sea that persisted throughout much of the summer. Comparison of the tracks of drifting buoys with monthly mean SLP charts shows a substantial Ekman drift. By means of linear regression analysis it is shown that Ekman drift during summer has played an important role in regulating annual minimum Arctic sea-ice extent in prior years as well. In combination, the preconditioning by events in prior years, as represented by an index of May multi-year ice, and current atmospheric conditions, as represented by an index of July-August-September SLP anomalies over the Arctic basin account for ~60% of the year-to-year variance of September sea ice extent since 1979.

In the Discussion the authors state:

We have shown that summertime SLP anomalies over the Arctic are as important as preconditioning by events in prior years in determining the variations in September Sea Ice Extent (SIE) from one year to the next, and our analysis suggests that they are even more important than preconditioning in determining how September SIE will change relative to conditions observed during the previous year.

The six summers that exhibited highest values of the SLP index (1995, 1998, 1999, 2005, 2007 and 2008) were all in the last half of the record. September SIE reached record lows in three of these years (1995, 2005, and 2007), and it nearly tied the record in 2008. Yet it is clear from Fig. 4c that the precipitous decline in September SIE in recent years is mainly due to the cumulative loss of multi-year ice: summertime SLP anomalies have played an important role in setting the timing of record lows, but the long term trend is mainly due to preconditioning.

Arctic climate system change has accelerated tremendously since the beginning of this century, and a strikingly extreme sea-ice loss occurred in summer 2007. However, the greenhouse-gas-emissions forcing has only increased gradually and the driving role in Arctic climate change of the positively-polarized Arctic/North Atlantic Oscillation (AO/NAO) trend has substantially weakened. Although various contributing factors have been examined, the fundamental physical process, which orchestrates these contributors to drive the acceleration and the latest extreme event, remains unknown. We report on drastic, systematic spatial changes in atmospheric circulations, showing a sudden jump from the conventional tri-polar AO/NAO to an unprecedented dipolar leading pattern, following accelerated northeastward shifts of the AO/NAO centers of action. These shifts provide an accelerating impetus for the recent rapid Arctic climate system changes, perhaps shedding light on recent arguments about a tipping point of global-warming-forced climate change in the Arctic. The radical spatial shift is a precursor to the observed extreme change event, demonstrating skilful information for future prediction.

Black carbon is also getting the blame for up to 45% of arctic warming.

I’m saying that the ’short record’ low for Arctic sea ice of 2007 wasn’t repeated in 2008, and won’t be repeated in 2009. Furthermore, there were a number of contributory factors for the record low of 2007, including atmospheric circulations – not CO2:

nice argument, but completely useless for your cause.

if we ignore 2007 (because it was caused “mainly” by wind), 2008 was a pretty normal year on the long time DOWNWARD trend. and that really just leaves Pileke with the first half of 2009 as his “upward” trend. ridiculous!

ps: i guess you did NOT understand this part of the article that you quoted above:

Yet it is clear from Fig. 4c that the precipitous decline in September SIE in recent years is mainly due to the cumulative loss of multi-year ice: summertime SLP anomalies have played an important role in setting the timing of record lows, but the long term trend is mainly due to preconditioning.

Sod – sea ice in the arctic has been reducing since the LIA – what is currently happening is not beyond natural variation and it’s definitely NOT increasing beyond expectations as Real Climate has been trying to scam! Ditto with rate of sea level increase which is actually reducing so again Real Climate are bullshitting.

If they are prepared to distort science to further their career/political agenda, and I don’t need Dr Pileke to direct me to it, then they have stooped to the lowest point in this whole nasty affair.

The fact remains that the global temperature of June 2009 is no greater than the global temperature of June 1979. There has been no increase in global temperature beyond natural variation.

Ha! This blog runs a cartoon complaining that Real Climate is into ad hominem attack! Oh the irony.

RC is, compared to here, that absolute pinnacle of reasoned and calm explanation of AGW research. As they made clear, their recent post indicating irritation with Pielke was due to what they took as a personal slight against their professionalism.

It’s more honest to allow no comments them to pretend to have an open forum and then censor anything that can cast doubt on the single point of view they wish to project. Even published peer reviewed researchers who don’t agree with their viewpoint and want to discuss the science, have been blocked from their site. Reprehensible.

Janama, people ask serious questions and get serious answers all there the time. What they don’t tolerate is twits such as those who want to revisit the basics (does CO2 cause warming at all?) ad infinitum. Those people can have their fun here, where (as I have said before) everything seemingly gets a run as long as it doubts AGW (or ocean acidification, for that matter.)

Recent mapping of a number of raised beach ridges on the north coast of Greenland suggests that the ice cover in the Arctic Ocean was greatly reduced some 6000-7000 years ago. The Arctic Ocean may have been periodically ice free.

”The climate in the northern regions has never been milder since the last Ice Age than it was about 6000-7000 years ago. We still don’t know whether the Arctic Ocean was completely ice free, but there was more open water in the area north of Greenland than there is today,” says Astrid Lyså, a geologist and researcher at the Geological Survey of Norway (NGU).

NGU: Less ice in the Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 years ago

The satellite record is short, for extent and thickness, compared to the 12,000 years of the Holocene so far, and the likes of Al Gore are predicting a sea ice free Arctic by 2012. There’s no point creating alarm over Arctic sea ice, when we can’t control it, and it’s actually not unusual during warm periods for ice to be drastically reduced or absent. Meanwhile, Antarctic sea ice hit a satellite record high at the same time as the arctic record low.

Will arctic sea ice vanish by 2012, or will it continue to climb above the 2007 low? I think it is the latter. We won’t have to wait long to find out.

“Scientists believe overall Arctic sea ice thinned about 7 inches (17.78 cm) a year since 2004, for a total of 2.2 feet (0.67 metres) over four winters.

Their findings were reported in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans. The total area covered by thicker, older ice that has survived at least one summer shrank by 42 percent.

Beyond that, the new satellite data showed that the proportion of tough old ice is decreasing at the same time as the amount of young fragile ice is increasing, information that was hard to discern from earlier data.

In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic’s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year ”

“In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic’s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year ”

Arctic air temperature change amplification and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation

By Petr Chylek, C.K. Folland, G. Lesins, M. Dubey and M. Wang

Abstract

Understanding Arctic temperature variability is essential for assessing possible future melting of the Greenland ice sheet, Arctic sea ice and Arctic permafrost. Temperature trend reversals in 1940 and 1970 separate two Arctic warming periods (1910-1940 and 1970-2008) by a significant 1940-1970 cooling period. Analyzing temperature records of the Arctic meteorological stations we find that (a) the Arctic amplification (ratio of the Arctic to global temperature trends) is not a constant but varies in time on a multi- decadal time scale, (b) the Arctic warming from 1910-1940 proceeded at a significantly faster rate than the current 1970-2008 warming, and (c) the Arctic temperature changes are highly correlated with the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) suggesting the Atlantic Ocean thermohaline circulation is linked to the Arctic temperature variability on a multi-decadal time scale

SJT says, like many alarmists “look – much less multi-year ice!”. Well DUH!
It was NOT increased temperatures in the arctic that produced the record low in 2008, it was WIND. It was WEATHER that caused this, NOT CLIMATE. Why can’t you understand the difference? Oh yeah, you do – you understand it well enough to complain when others make this mistake, but you still trot it out. Perhaps it is your preconcieved ideas that distort your perceptions? Perhaps you have an AGENDA?

Let me quote myself with regards to this annoying foolishness about melting ice in the arctic. I’ll edit it a bit for swearwords:

“A word about Far North melting. We see that the air temperature peaked in 1998. The solar cycle peak (I THINK) from memory was sometime in 2001, the imbedded oceanic energy peak seems to have been in September 2003….. And yet the arctic ice got to a record minimum cover and thickness around about September 2007. GLOBAL WARMING? Industrial-CO2?

Nothing stands more to reason than the idea that after accumulating a great deal of joules the ocean would continue to help melt the arctic sea ice up North even as the climate more generally was cooling. What on earth could be strange about that?

Suppose you are running hot water into a cold bath. And you have ice floating up the cold end. And you are working the hot water into the cold with your hand. Suppose you then turn off the hot tap. And you continue moving hot water down to the cold end. Is the ice going to keep melting after the hot tap is turned off? Of course it is. I wish people would not be so stupid about this.

But on the other hand the closest thing we have to the idiotic alarmist model here on earth is the months-long daytime in the arctic summer. So if the CO2 was going to have some effect maybe that would be the place for it.”